Montblanc

Gaz
537

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Good points...

You make some good points and it got me thinking about my use of bespoke tailoring as an analogy. I did have some reservations about the use of the word "bespoke" since it could be interpreted, as you rightly did, that I was apply it to bespoke watch making. Of course, this is not the matter which we are discussing. Allow me to clarify...

When one goes to a bespoke tailor, one is buying the experience and intellectual capital that the particular tailor has amassed over the years in fitting a lot of different body shapes and sizes. One is also buying the tailor's interpretation on what fabric, drape, cut and fit that best suits one's particular body shape. To some extent, one is also buying the "style" or approach to fashion. Haute Couture follows the same logic as does bespoke shoes or luxury hand assembled sport cars in varying degrees.

What I was drawing from “bespokeness” is that when one purchases haute horlogerie from Patek, AP or Vacheron, one is buying their interpretation a wristwatch, may it be aesthetic or technical. They have a long and rich history of know how in manufacturing, assembling and most importantly technical R&D that they have invested in their interpretation. This is no different to bespoke tailoring after all, a watch is a watch as a suit is a suit but what makes a fine suit or "haute horlogerie" is in the finer details in execution. There is absolutely no pretence about their heritage. It is this intangible intellectual property that manifests itself in the more tangible product - the cut of the suit or the layout of the movement design.

So, to clarify the use of the term bespoke, I do not reference bespoke watch making per se but rather the "in-house" knowledge that is transformed into the tangible end product. Of course there are some degree of "mass production" or efficiency of the value chain in all manufacturing bar those who are true artisans (Dufour is one, Hidetaka Fukaya is one, Liverano & Liverano, bespoke tailor in Florence is one) where the word's "hand crafted" actually means something.

I agree that we don't have 250 years to build up the history but this is no different to Tom Ford, outsourcing to Zegna to position himself to compete for the bespoke tailor market, one year after he left Gucci. Yes, Tom Ford is a fantastic designer. Yes, he is well respected and indeed an amazing businessman. And yes, he has his brand that gives him significant legitimacy but at least he has the guts to say that he offers a made-to-measure service and not try to pass himself off as a bespoke tailor.

What I have an issue is the attempt to gain legitimacy by proxy, association or in Montblanc's case, by acquisition. It may be good enough to raise interest in the less sophisticated buyer but I feel it is a bit naive on Montblanc's part to think that this would work on the more informed buyer. I am sure in the eyes of the mass consumer, they would see Montblanc-Minerva as haute but I certainly don't. I would wager that some in our community would not either. However, I must say that legitimacy seems to sticking (faux or otherwise), if seasoned and astute collector are able to put Montblanc-Minerva on the same high pedestal that Lange, Breguet and GO occupy.

Perhaps my argument is flawed.  But I am one but voice against the marketing steamroller of the Richemont Group.  I will continue to pay particular interesting to Montblanc’s brand extension.

Gaz